Winning With Maths (LoL)

[superman]

As the main focus seems to be on James Wendels threads I thought I would start a new thread rather than hijack his.

Over a few years I have found that ANY EC trigger will, overtime, return the same old 48 - 49 % win/loss ratio, I prefer to play EC's and online RNG, if you disagree with either of these choices don't bother reading or replying.

Back on topic, as stated above, any trigger will do, it's how you handle your money that makes a big difference, and it isn't invisible or on another dimension. martingale sucks, forget it, no matter how long you survive it wont last.

I have been testing to great length, +1 every bet you are behind until ahead, I then noticed on long losing streaks it would recover to within lets say 80% of when the bad streak started and the progression was say at 8 units, so I started to test further and ended up with this

if progression greater than 5 AND current units greater than 80% of target units reset progression to 1

sort of like, 10 steps forward and maybe 2 or 3 back during tough runs.

Hope that helps or prompts some of you RNG players into not looking too hard for triggers as there really isn't anything that I have found.

Of course YMMV, enjoy

[caddy]

Superman,

Can you give us a sample of this?

Thanks

[superman]

Here's your sample

Target 42 Current 32 Prog 5 - L
Target 42 Current 27 Prog 6 - L
Target 42 Current 21 Prog 7 - L
Target 42 Current 14 Prog 8 - L
Target 42 Current 22 Prog 9 - W
Target 42 Current 31 Prog 10 - W
Target 42 Current 41 Prog 11 - W <<<-------- reset here
Target 42 Current 40 Prog 1 - L

And another one

Target 308 Current 305 Prog 8 < reset here as its near

the above ended like this during a test

Target 308 Current -2838 Prog 368
Target 308 Current -3206 Prog 369
Target 308 Current -3575 Prog 370
Target 308 Current -3945 Prog 371
Target 308 Current -4316 Prog 372

Target is the highest it reached during betting, current is how near it is to getting ahead of target, sometimes when we battle to get back after a run of losses we would settle for a small loss just to reset the progression.

HTH

[F_LAT_INO]

As the main focus seems to be on James Wendels threads I thought I would start a new thread rather than hijack his.

Over a few years I have found that ANY EC trigger will, overtime, return the same old 48 - 49 % win/loss ratio, I prefer to play EC's and online RNG, if you disagree with either of these choices don't bother reading or replying.

Back on topic, as stated above, any trigger will do, it's how you handle your money that makes a big difference, and it isn't invisible or on another dimension. martingale sucks, forget it, no matter how long you survive it wont last.

I have been testing to great length, +1 every bet you are behind until ahead, I then noticed on long losing streaks it would recover to within lets say 80% of when the bad streak started and the progression was say at 8 units, so I started to test further and ended up with this

if progression greater than 5 AND current units greater than 80% of target units reset progression to 1

sort of like, 10 steps forward and maybe 2 or 3 back during tough runs.

Hope that helps or prompts some of you RNG players into not looking too hard for triggers as there really isn't anything that I have found.

Of course your mileage may vary, enjoy

If you closely observe my-Promised winning method-thread,then
you will notice in the second version similarity,if not identical,approach.

[Bayes]

Hi superman,

I haven't found any reliable "triggers" either, those who claim otherwise simply haven't done enough testing. As you say, it really comes down to money-management. I know the maths says you can't overcome the negative expectation by using MM alone but I've found that it's not the case. I often use a similar progression to the one you mention: +1 on a loss AND on a win (if you're not in profit). This isn't nearly so scary as it sounds. You can reduce your stakes if you feel they're getting out of hand and then continue the progression until you're in profit (or nearly so).

[superman]

Yes Bayes, MM is really looking like it's the key, here's another example just off the press

Target 136 Current 7 Prog 33 - L
Target 136 Current -26 Prog 34 - L
Target 136 Current -60 Prog 35 - L
Target 136 Current -25 Prog 36 - W
Target 136 Current 11 Prog 37 - W
Target 136 Current 48 Prog 38 - W
Target 136 Current 86 Prog 39 - W
Target 136 Current 125 Prog 40 - W <<--------reset here
Target 136 Current 126 Prog 2 - W

As you can see the bet after the reset would have won so the target would have improved + 41 but, more often than not, the next bet would have lost, this is set using the, if within 80% of target then reset.

What I have noticed using this approach is you tend to go up and down much more often thus reducing the overall profit/bets ratio, spending more time trying to recover to within 80% but it feels more comfortable.

All tests are performed in REAL money mode as usual with all my testing.